https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #4 from Anders Sjögren anders at sjogren dot info ---
Thanks for fixing the bug!
It seems that the test file
https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc/trunk/gcc/testsuite/g%2B%2B.dg/cpp1y/pr60943.C?view=markuppathrev=223502
contains an error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #6 from Anders Sjögren anders at sjogren dot info ---
An alternative test case, which also tests that the correct version is
selected, could be:
#include type_traits
using expected_lvalue_res_t = int;
using expected_rvalue_res_t =
2015-05-21 22:08 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Makarov vmaka...@redhat.com:
On 05/21/2015 05:54 AM, Ilya Enkovich wrote:
Thanks. For me it looks like an inheritance bug. It is really hard
to fix the bug w/o the source code. Could you send me your patch in
order I can debug RA with it to investigate
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
On 05/22/2015 10:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
Hi,
in order to get the IBM z13 support into present distros the Linux
distributors asked me to get this
stuff upstream into the older GCC
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:40:26AM +0200, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
On 05/18/2015 04:19 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
Please use uint64_t instead.
Done. Ok with that change?
I've applied the following patch.
Bye,
-Andreas-
gcc/
* recog.h: Increase MAX_RECOG_ALTERNATIVES.
Change
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Let's wait for Alan's patch that makes combine not reorder things
unnecessarily, that should take care of it all as far as I see.
Patch here https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg02055.html
It doesn't do anything fancy,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66233
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 22 08:12:08 2015
New Revision: 223522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223522root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2015-05-21
On Thu, 21 May 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hi,
this is next part of the series. It disables canonical type calculation for
incomplete types with exception of arrays based on claim that we do not have
good notion of those.
I can botostrap this with additional checks in alias.c that canonical
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66199
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 22 08:10:32 2015
New Revision: 223521
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223521root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2015-05-19
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #7 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Created attachment 35595
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35595action=edit
Experimental fix
Can you please check whether this patch works for you? The patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
Hi,
On 04/30/2015 01:56 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
this seems pretty straightforward given the grammar. Tested x86_64-linux.
... again, given the grammar, I think this is even obvious: if nobody
screams, I'm going to commit the patch in a day or so (but I'm naming
the testcase
On Thu, 21 May 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Code quality does not seem to be affected too much,
which I suppose is partly thanks to that tree-ssa-alias.c pointer hack.
My
main point was to cleanup the hack about comparing only TYPE_CODE of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66133
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 22 08:04:41 2015
New Revision: 223520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223520root=gccview=rev
Log:
Backported from mainline
2015-05-13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61071
--- Comment #2 from Krzysztof Kundzicz athantor+gccbugzilla at athi dot pl ---
GCC 5.1 - no change.
Compiling with clang generates debugable binary.
Bug report at ASAN project:
https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/issues/detail?id=390
[Added PR number and updated patches]
On Aarch64, the __sync builtins are implemented using the __atomic operations
and barriers. This makes the the __sync builtins inconsistent with their
documentation which requires stronger barriers than those for the __atomic
builtins.
The difference
On 05/22/2015 10:22 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
Hi,
in order to get the IBM z13 support into present distros the Linux
distributors asked me to get this
stuff upstream into the older GCC branches first. This would ease the whole
backporting
Hi Kyrill,
Sorry for little delay in responding.
-Original Message-
From: Kyrill Tkachov [mailto:kyrylo.tkac...@foss.arm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:13 PM
To: Kumar, Venkataramanan; James Greenhalgh; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan;
On Fri, 10 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
The following patch fixes a typo (I think) which is present since the
original introduction of the code in vect_enhance_data_refs_alignment.
if (do_peeling
all_misalignments_unknown
On Fri, 22 May 2015, Andreas Krebbel wrote:
Hi,
in order to get the IBM z13 support into present distros the Linux
distributors asked me to get this
stuff upstream into the older GCC branches first. This would ease the whole
backporting efforts,
interactions with other patches and would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47043
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Fri May 22 09:07:31 2015
New Revision: 223527
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223527root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c/47043
* c-common.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
--- Comment #13 from asmwarrior asmwarrior at gmail dot com ---
I did some further test with the condition I stated in comment 11. That is gcc
5.1.
Now, I have pch.h.gch file (about 200M) already generated.
First thing, I try to see whether
Hi,
in order to get the IBM z13 support into present distros the Linux distributors
asked me to get this
stuff upstream into the older GCC branches first. This would ease the whole
backporting efforts,
interactions with other patches and would make sure that everybody uses the
same code level.
My apologies for the delay on Ada. I have reworked the patch to leave
the first pass on the TYPE_DECLs which are definitely needed. I also
optimized things a bit, since we don't need to save all the globals any
more.
Thanks, this looks fine modulo a couple of nits, see below.
There is one
[Added PR number and updated patches]
This patch adds tests for the code generated by the Aarch64 backend for the
__sync builtins.
Tested aarch64-none-linux-gnu with check-gcc.
Ok for trunk?
Matthew
gcc/testsuite/
2015-05-21 Matthew Wahab matthew.wa...@arm.com
PR target/65697
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Doesn't this disable all the other s390 tests?
Supposedly you need to prune them from the non-torture lists, see e.g.
g++.dg/dg.exp on how it prunes tests.
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 02:00:26PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 05/07/2015 12:22 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
- mark_used (decl);
+ mark_used (decl, 0);
This should use tf_none rather than 0.
Fixed.
+ build_enumerator (DECL_NAME (decl), value, newtag,
+
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47043
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
(a) the official rules are completely pointless, and make sense
only because the standard is written for some random abstract
machine that doesn't actually exist.
Presuming the intent of the abstract machine specification is to avoid
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:48:29AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
Ok to apply with that change?
Yes, thanks.
I've applied the following.
Bye,
-Andreas-
gcc/
* optabs.c (expand_vec_perm): Don't re-use SEL as target operand.
---
gcc/optabs.c |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2
On Thu, 21 May 2015, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Hmm, I see, interesting hack. For the first part of comment, I see that
qualifiers needs to be ignored, but I do not see why we put
short * and int * pointers to same class.
For the reason that people are very lazy. For example GCC has code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60943
--- Comment #5 from Anders Sjögren anders at sjogren dot info ---
A typo snuck in...
However, as an l-value at the site of the call[...]
should be
However, a is an l-value at the site of the call[...]
This patch fixes
FAIL: gcc.target/powerpc/ti_math1.c scan-assembler-times adde 1
a failure caused by combine simplifying this i2src
(plus:DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 165 [ val+8 ])
(reg:DI 169 [+8 ]))
(reg:DI 76 ca))
to this
(plus:DI (plus:DI (reg:DI 76 ca)
(reg:DI 165 [ val+8 ]))
This patch fixes a bug introduced by refactoring. A cast from rtx_insn
to rtx_jump_insn in fix_crossing_conditional_branches was placed before
the check, and that caused ICE if the instruction is actually a call,
rather than a jump.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64 linux and tested the regressed
[Added PR number and updated patches]
This patch changes the code generated for __sync_type_compare_and_swap to
ldxr reg; cmp; bne label; stlxr; cbnz; label: dmb ish; mov .., reg
This removes the acquire-barrier from the load and ends the operation with a
fence to prevent memory references
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:22:07AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
I'm somewhat missing the point of backporting z13 support. ppc64le
enablement was a different story (IBM basically saying ppc64-linux
is dead), but surely all z13 machines can run non-z13 code just fine.
s390x-linux-gnu is a
FWIW, Ada is filled with these temporaries and/or types that should
really be ignored, and are currently causing grief.
It's a little hard to believe that types created in a front-end should be
marked ignored. Either they are used by some objects and thus can be needed
in the debug info, or
This update corrects two problems in the handling of Atomic.
First we do not need Atomic_Synchronization for an object
renaming declaration. Second, when we do have a renaming of
an atomic object, the renaming object should be marked as atomic.
Compiling this test:
1. package Renamed_Atomic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc
On 05/21/2015 11:02 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Pedro Alves pal...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/21/2015 10:12 PM, Sriraman Tallam wrote:
My original proposal, for x86_64 only, was to add
-fno-plt=function-name. This lets the user decide for which
functions PLT must
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Target Milestone: ---
recent regression (last day):
gcc version 6.0.0 20150522 (experimental) [trunk revision 223512] (GCC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66103
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Due to r223391, a variant of this already fails without LTO - see PR66214.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66214
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Works after reverting Honza's r223391.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66251
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Hi Venkat,
On 22/05/15 09:50, Kumar, Venkataramanan wrote:
Hi Kyrill,
Sorry for little delay in responding.
-Original Message-
From: Kyrill Tkachov [mailto:kyrylo.tkac...@foss.arm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:13 PM
To: Kumar, Venkataramanan; James Greenhalgh;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65701
--- Comment #17 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 22 09:08:46 2015
New Revision: 223528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223528root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-05-22 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66240
--- Comment #3 from Josh Triplett josh at joshtriplett dot org ---
(In reply to Denis Vlasenko from comment #2)
(In reply to Josh Triplett from comment #1)
Another alternative discussed in that thread, which seems near-ideal: align
functions
On 05/22/2015 09:39 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Eric Botcazou ebotca...@adacore.com writes:
Some pieces of code create a temporary REG or MEM and only fill it
in later when they're testing the cost of a particular rtx. This patch
makes sure that even the dummy REG or MEM is valid, rather than
On 05/22/2015 02:27 AM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
This patch fixes a bug introduced by refactoring. A cast from rtx_insn
to rtx_jump_insn in fix_crossing_conditional_branches was placed before
the check, and that caused ICE if the instruction is actually a call,
rather than a jump.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66256
Bug ID: 66256
Summary: noexcept evaluation done before end of class
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
This is the final patch to the PA backend to cleanup its handling of
shadd insns and scaled indexed addressing modes.
First, it removes the old non-canonical shadd insns.
Second, it removes some non-canonical peephole patterns. No idea what I
was thinking when I wrote them. Given they're
On 05/20/2015 08:04 PM, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-
ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Preud'homme
From: Steven Bosscher [mailto:stevenb@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 7:21 PM
Not OK.
This will break in move_invariants()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
Although I have marked the PR as a regression, I am not sure that it is not
INVALID: the error has been introduced on purpose.
I
On 05/21/2015 02:01 PM, Andreas Tobler wrote:
On 21.05.15 20:14, Andreas Tobler wrote:
On 20.05.15 22:30, Jeff Law wrote:
On 05/20/2015 11:04 AM, Andreas Tobler wrote:
Hi,
the attached patch enables some PIE tests on FreeBSD.
Ok for trunk?
Thanks,
Andreas
2015-05-20 Andreas Tobler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66079
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35603
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35603action=edit
Nearly OK patch
The attached bootstraps and regtests on 6.0.0. The following runs without
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
Bug ID: 66257
Summary: Regression: ELEMENTAL procedure pointer component XX
is not allowed as an actual argument
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Andrew Chambers
andrewchambe...@gmail.com wrote:
For example, I've tested on an x86, built cross compilers for ppc64 and
ppc64le and then can invoke the native go tool (built to run on x86) to
compile with either target compiler by changing my GOARCH value. I
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Yunlian Jiang yunl...@google.com wrote:
GCC bootstraps with this patch.
Committed as follows.
Ian
include/:
2015-05-22 Yunlian Jiang yunl...@google.com
* libiberty.h (asprintf): Don't declare if HAVE_DECL_ASPRINTF is
not defined.
libiberty/:
2015-05-22
On Mon, 18 May 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr wrote:
we already have the more complicated: x ~(x y) - x ~y (which I am
reindenting by the way) and the simpler: (~x | y) x - x y, so I am
proposing this one for completeness.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66237
--- Comment #6 from Mikhail Maltsev miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: miyuki
Date: Fri May 22 22:58:22 2015
New Revision: 223596
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223596root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/66237
* bb-reorder.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66251
Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
On 05/22/2015 09:42 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
This patch adjusts the fix for PR target/65689 along the lines suggested
in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-04/msg01559.html. The idea
is to reuse the existing gensupport.c routine to work out the codes
accepted by constraints.
I'd
These should have gone in with the first patch in the series.
Thankfully the splitters aren't terribly important anymore and thus
having them goof'd up for a couple days hasn't been a problem.
In fact, much like the hppa_legitimize_address code to handle
shift-add/scaled addressing modes,
This patch is the first in a series of patches that will eventually add support
for IEEE 128-bit floating point support to the PowerPC GCC compiler. At the
current time, we do not plan to change the default for long double. I added a
new type keyword (__float128) to get access to IEEE 128-bit
On 22.05.2015 12:10, Marek Polacek wrote:
Thanks, applied. Here's the final version.
By the way, we have a feature test macro, __cpp_attributes=200809 which
can be used to determine, whether C++11 attribute syntax is supported by
the compiler.
I propose to add something similar for this
On 05/22/2015 09:45 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 09:24:37AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
When combine needs to split a complex insn, it will canonicalize a
simple (mult X (const_int Y)) where Y is a power of 2 into the expected
(ashift X (const_int Y')) if the (mult ...) is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66257
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Print Pass Names
From: richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 21:32:24 +0200
To: hiradi...@msn.com; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
On May 22, 2015 6:32:38 PM GMT+02:00, Aditya K hiradi...@msn.com wrote:
Currently, when we
On 05/22/2015 02:38 PM, Aditya K wrote:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Print Pass Names
From: richard.guent...@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 21:32:24 +0200
To: hiradi...@msn.com; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
On May 22, 2015 6:32:38 PM GMT+02:00, Aditya K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56926
--- Comment #14 from asmwarrior asmwarrior at gmail dot com ---
The bug can be seen when -E and -fpch-preprocess is used together to
generate a preprocessed file.
If I have a small pch file named spch.h and spch.h.gch(note the spch.h.gch
size is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66259
Bug ID: 66259
Summary: Combined gcc and binutils build from git-master fails,
with gas/as-new not existing
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
I bootstrapped this on powerpc-ibm-aix7.1.0.0 and my colleagues
bootstrapped this on powerpc64-linux and powerpc64le-linux.
It works and produces reasonable instruction sequences.
We can iterate on the syntax, but the core concept seems to work correctly.
Thanks, David
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66258
Bug ID: 66258
Summary: compiling a stdarg function with arch +nofp generates
an ICE
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Tristan Gingold ging...@adacore.com wrote:
2015-05-21 Tristan Gingold ging...@adacore.com
* pecoff.c: New file.
* Makefile.am (FORMAT_FILES): Add pecoff.c and dependencies.
* Makefile.in: Regenerate.
* filetype.awk: Detect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66259
--- Comment #1 from Michael Darling darlingm at gmail dot com ---
BTW, this happens on stage 2.
Uncombined build works just fine...
If I:
mkdir binutils.build.gcc492
cd binutils.build.gcc492
../gcc.binutils.combined/binutils-gdb.git/configure
The compiler currently ICEs when compiling a stdarg function with
+nofp, as reported in PR 66258.
The aarch64.md file disables FP instructions using TARGET_FLOAT, which
supports both -mgeneral-regs-only and +nofp. But there is code in
aarch64.c that checks TARGET_GENERAL_REGS_ONLY. This results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53477
--- Comment #22 from Tomasz Gajewski tomga at wp dot pl ---
In comment #10 I've provided test patch to test case that exposed a problem
(and in comment #11 some fix to all those tests). Currently I can't check if it
applies cleanly and if errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63387
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: glisse
Date: Fri May 22 21:05:26 2015
New Revision: 223591
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223591root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-05-22 Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr
On 05/20/2015 10:41 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:36:25AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
These fix the remaining leaks in the threader that I'm aware of. We failed
to properly clean-up when we had to cancel certain jump threading
opportunities. So thankfully this wasn't a big
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Andrew Chambers
andrewchambe...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not suggesting breaking go conventions, I just think the default if no
GOARCH is specified then it should match --target.
Sounds good to me.
Perhaps we could check the symlink name for the target triple if
PING: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg01511.html
This only needs approval from Fortran maintainers.
On 17 May 2015 at 20:22, Manuel López-Ibáñez lopeziba...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch finishes the conversion of Fortran diagnostics to use the
common diagnostics by removing
] = fooT;
^
prog.cc:6:34: error: expected primary-expression before ';' token
constexpr bool fooT[N] = fooT;
^
prog.cc:6: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
6.0 20150522 at least tries to compile the recursion, but fails nonetheless
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66255
Mikhail Maltsev miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Bin Cheng bin.ch...@arm.com wrote:
Hi,
As we know, GCC is too conservative when checking overflow behavior in SCEV
and loop related optimizers. Result is some variable can't be recognized as
scalar evolution and thus optimizations are missed. To be specific,
I will take a look if I can improve type_in_anonymous_namepsace somehow. So
Ada produces TYPE_DECL with DECL_ABSTRACT that do have TYPE_STUB_DECL with
TREE_PUBLIC NULL I suppose.
Do you mean DECL_ARTIFICIAL instead of DECL_ABSTRACT? If so, presumably, yes,
why wouldn't it do that? That
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Thomas Schwinge
tho...@codesourcery.com wrote:
Hi!
It's just been a year. ;-P
In early March, I (hopefully correctly) adapted Tom's patch to apply to
then-current GCC trunk sources; posting this here. Is the general
approach OK?
On Tue, 20 May 2014
This is to fix two warning: `.' or `,' must follow @xref, not )
occurences.
Applying to trunk.
2015-05-22 Marek Polacek pola...@redhat.com
* doc/extend.texi: Use @pxref instead of @xref.
diff --git gcc/doc/extend.texi gcc/doc/extend.texi
index 5539199..6c51bc4 100644
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65415
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Hi,
the patch (65548) this one depends on is in trunk now.
Still bootstraps ok and regtests with the issue in
gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constructor_1.f90 (which is addressed by the patch for
pr58586 already) on x86_64-linux-gnu/f21.
Ok for trunk?
- Andre
On Tue, 19 May 2015 12:26:02 +0200
Andre
This patch implements the following rule with respect to constants:
SPARK RM 7.1.1(2) - The hidden state of a package P consists of:
* any variables, or constants with variable inputs, declared immediately in
the private part or body of P.
Constants without variable input are not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #11 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
As for the hotpatch testcases, have you tested them also with
-fno-dwarf2-cfi-asm (as they seem to contain .cfi directives in the
Now we have it spelled out 4 times ... makes sense to create a new
macro for it? (though I cannot think of a good name...
UNACCESSIBLE_TYPE_P ()?)
Yep, actually I already made that version of patch yesterday but then got
hooked by beers. This is better version (also with more sensible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65061
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Jason, shall we just close this as fixed in 5.1, or we want to try backporting
the simple fix to 4_9-branch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66215
--- Comment #9 from Dominik Vogt vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Yeah, I accidentally left the other test cases commented out. I'll clean that
up in the next version of the patch. That doesn't have an impact on the
correctness of the code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65598
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
All,
This patch removes the special casing for targets with relaxed memory
ordering and handles guard accesses with equivalent atomic load acquire
operations. In this process we change the algorithm to load the guard
variable with an atomic load that has ACQUIRE semantics. I'm not
terribly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62171
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
It may already work
if you use C++ and
static double __attribute__((noinline, noclone))
f (struct omp_data_i __restrict__ p, int argc)
{
?
machmode.def has
/* Allow the target to specify additional modes of various kinds. */
/* Complex modes. */
COMPLEX_MODES (INT);
COMPLEX_MODES (FLOAT);
/* Decimal floating point modes. */
DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE (SD, 4, decimal_single_format);
DECIMAL_FLOAT_MODE (DD, 8, decimal_double_format);
1 - 100 of 247 matches
Mail list logo
